TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Ask HN: Any recommended resources to sharpen logical thinking?

3 点作者 febin将近 7 年前

3 条评论

westoncb将近 7 年前
My advice would be to shift your focus to 1) knowledge, 2) domain-specific practice.<p>There are a lot of very fundamental&#x2F;general concepts that apply to pretty much any domain you want to think in, and they can be some work to acquire, but are also worth it. I think the greatest value I got from reading in mathematics (especially history of mathematics) and philosophy was familiarity and practice with some of those most general terms&#x2F;concepts. Things written for &#x27;the intelligent layperson&#x27; tend to make heavy use of these terms&#x2F;concepts (since they can&#x27;t rely on the particular jargon of the field they&#x27;re describing); so you&#x27;ll pick up more by reading things that fall in that category. It&#x27;s a decent bit of work depending on your background, but I&#x27;d recommend working through Eddington&#x27;s <i>Philosophy of Physical Science</i> —if I had to choose one. It&#x27;s not too long, consistently interesting, and focuses a lot on exactly the sort of general terms I&#x27;ve been talking about; e.g. there&#x27;s a chapter getting at the meaning of &#x27;structure&#x27;.<p>But perhaps more importantly, people tend to underestimate how specialized their practice is—or how little it generalizes rather. For example, if you want to get good at writing computer programs—the best way of doing it is to spend your time writing real computer programs like the ones you want to be able to write well. Spending your time practicing by doing anything else will fall short of that.
brudgers将近 7 年前
Wittgenstein, <i>Philosophical Investigations</i>
wakeywakeywakey将近 7 年前
Sleep, exercise.